r Mastering Imperial Space? The Ambivalent Impact of Railway Building in Tsarist Russia, in: Jörn Leonard, Ulrike FrithjofBenjamin Schenk 61 von Hirschhausen (Hg.): Comparing Empires. Encounters Frithjof Benjamin Schenk and Transfers in the Long Nineteenth Century, Göttingen tension" almost begged for the construction of railways. 4 Pavel Mel'nikov, 2011, S. 60-77, ISBN 978-3-525-31040-3. a young Russian engineer and later Russia's first Minister of Communi- cations, enthusiastically Mastering Imperial Space? exclaimed in 1838 that the railways had been "in- vented for Russia more than for any other country in Europe."5 The Ambivalent Impact of Railway-Building in Tsarist Russia 1. Infrastructures: an Object of Imperial History For a long time, historians have been treating the history of infrastructures primarily from the perspective of economic history. 6 At the same time it has been often overlooked that railways in nineteenth-century empires were also Until recently, comparative historical research on European empires has constructed for political and strategic purposes. This holds especially true mainly focused on the question of how the different imperial elites ad- for Tsarist Russia. After the defeat in the Crimean War, Tsar Alexander II dressed the problem of political rule over a variety of ethnic, religious, and gave the green light to construction of a network of railways in European cultural groups in the nineteenth century. 1 The strategies that were devel- Russia in 1857 primarily out of strategic considerations. Apart from two oped and deployed in the Ottoman, the Habsburg, and the Russian em- trunk lines connecting St, Petersburg with Moscow and Warsaw with pires to exert control over their large and expanding territories have not Vienna, Russia had not constructed any major public railways before the been analysed in comparable depth so far. 2 In Tsarist Russia, which in the outbreak of the war against France, England and the Ottoman Empire in late nineteenth century constituted the largest 7 continental empire in the 1853. The difficulties of supplying the fortress of Sevastopol at the southern world, the consolidation of imperial space seemed to be an issue of special frontier with troops and provisions and the disgraceful defeat against the concern. "Russia suffers from its geographical magnitude;' Tsar Nicholas I European powers on home territory highlighted the urgent need to develop once complained. 3 This statement pointed not only to the large distances and modernize Russia's infrastructures. Whereas before the Crimean War separating the capital of St. Petersburg from the imperial peripheries but the transport policy ofNicholas I had been influenced mainly by traditional- also to the poor condition of Russian roads and waterways. When news of ists and proponents of canal and road construction, his successor Alexander the first public railway in Western Europe reached St. Petersburg in the II gave his support to the competing ideological camp of railway enthusiasts. 1820s, progressive scholars and engineers soon argued that Russia with her On January 26, 1857 the Tsar-reformer issued a decree calling the construc- underdeveloped network of communications and her "vast territorial ex- 1 For the state of the art in contemporary historiography on the Russian Empire: 4 One of the first proposals for the construction of a public R. Vulpius, "Das Imperium railway in Russia was for- als Thema der Russischen Geschichte", Zeitenblicke 6 (2007) 2, mulated by N. P. Shcheglov, 0 zheleznykh dorogakh i URL: http://www.zeitenblicke.de/2007/2/vulpius/index_html preimushchestve ikh nad obyknoven- (24.12.2007). nymi dorogami i kanalami (St Petersburg, 1830), 5. 2 F. B. Schenk, "Imperiale Raumerschließung: Beherrschung der russischen Weite", 5 P. P. Mel'nikov, "Svedeniia o russkikh zheleznykh dorogakh': P. P. Osteuropa 3 (2005), in Mel'nikov. Inz- 33-45. New scholarship stresses the importance of"territoriality" for hener, Uchenyi, Gosudarstvennyi deiatel; ed. the Ivi. I. Voronin et al. (St Petersburg, 2003), understanding of polities such as the Russian Empire: J. Burbank and M. von Hagen, 223-398, 276. "Coming Into the Territory: Uncertainty and Empire", in Russian 6 M. Empire. Space, People, Beaumont and M. Freeman, "Preface", in The Railway and Modernity. Time, Power. 1700-1930, ed. idem, A. Remnev (Bloomington, 2007), 1-29, Space, 5, 21. On the concept and the Machine Ensemble, ed. idem (Oxford, 2007), 7-11, 9. Two Russian publi- of "territoriality" in general: C. S. Maier, "Consigning the Twentieth Century to History", cations confirming this observation: E. Ia. Kraskovskii, ed., Istoriia zheleznodorozhnogo American Historical Review 105 (2000), 807-831, 819-821. On the impact of modern transporta Rossii, vol. 1: 1836-1917 (St Petersburg, 1994); A. M. Solov'eva, Zheleznodo- technology on imperial rule in colonial empires: D. Headrick, The Tools of Empire. Tech- rozhnyi transport Rossii vo vtoroi polovine XIX v. (Moscow, 1975). - On new nology and European Imperialism in the methodologi- Nineteenth Century (Oxford, 1981); D. van Laak, cal approaches in the historiography of infrastructures: D. Imperiale Infrastruktur. van Laak, "Infra-Strukturge- Deutsche Planungen für die Erschließung Afrikas 1880 bis 1960 schichte': Geschichte und Gesellschaft 27 (2001), (Paderborn,2004),35-43. 367-393; J. I. Engels and J. Obertreis, "Infrastrukturen in der Modeme: Einführung in ein junges 3 R. M. Haywood, Forschungsfeld", Saeculum. The Beginnings of Railway Development in Russia in the Reign of Jahrbuch für Universalgeschichte 58 (2007), 1-12. Nicholas I. 1835-1842 (Durham, 1969), 230. 7 Kraskovskii, Istoriia zheleznodorozhnogo transporta Rossii, vol. I, 75. • 62 Mastering Imperial Space? Frithjof Benjamin Schenk 63 tion of a network of railways in European Russia a "national endeavour" and of the entire network, which of course remained rather low in comparison, the expression of the "common wish." 8 for example, with the German or the Habsburg Empire. 11 The idea to supply Russia with a functioning and effective network of rail- ways confronted the economically backward country with great difficulties. Large distances had tobe bridged, andin the early phase of railway construc- 2. Railways: an Instrument of Imperial Rule tion all the necessary technical equipment had tobe imported from Western Europe. Besides private investors both from Russia and abroad, the Tsarist The network of railways contributed significantly to the economic progress government was also an important player in the field of railway-building of the Tsarist Empire, especially in the era of rapid industrialization in Russia throughout the nineteenth century. The state kept an eye on plans and con- after 1890. However, the new means of communication was not only an im- cessions for new railways, offered private entrepreneurs fixed bonus rates for portant tool to boost commerce and the development of Russia's heavy in- their invested capital, and became itself a major investor in important trunk dustry. Steam engines and trains were used by the Tsarist regime from the lines. Especially when a railway seemed to be of great strategic and military very beginning as instruments of imperial rule. The validity of this thesis importance, the government mobilized state funds to cover the costs of con- may be illustrated with four examples. struction and operation. For example, the three trans-continental lines, the First, the Russian railways played an important role as a means of trans- Trans-Caspian, the Trans-Siberian, and the Orenburg-Tashkent Railways, portation for troops and prisoners from one part of the country to the other. 9 were entirely financed by the Tsarist government. Among the first official documents regulating traffic on the railway from St. Despite the fact that the Russian Empire initially was not among the Petersburg to Moscow were the instructions for the relocation of detainees avant-garde in railway construction in Europe, in the last decades of the and soldiers in the l 850s. 12 Nicholas I was fascinated by the idea of using the nineteenth century the country's network of railways grew rapidly.10 railways for the quick relocation of his army in order to suppress internal Whereas in the period between 1857 and the end of the 1880s railways were political revolts. The Austrian engineer and entrepreneur Franz Anton von mainly built in the European part of the realm, the Asian periphery was con- Gerstner, who tried to convince the Tsar in 1835 of the necessity of a network nected with the Russian heartland in the 1890s and later. In 1900 Russia al- of railways in European Russia, highlighted in his memorandum ofJanuary 6 ready possessed the second largest network of railways in the world - a fact that England had successfully used the railway from Manchester to Liver- that reflected more the length of railway lines in operation than the density pool for the transport of troops to contain a revolt (bezpokoistvie) in Ire- land.13 This was obviously meant as an allusion to the events of the Novem- ber Uprising in the Polish Kingdom in 1830-31. Gerstner stressed that a 8 Ukaz "O sooruzhenii pervoi seti zheleznykh dorog v Rossii" in Polnoe Sobranie Za- railway between Moscow and St. Petersburg would enable the government konov Rossiiskoi Imperii. Sobranie vtoroe, vol. XXXII: Otdelenie pervoe. 1857 (St Peters- to transfer large army units from one city to the other within two days. An- burg, 1858),no. 31448, 72-92, 73. 9 On the Trans-Caspian Railway (1880-1888): W. E. Wheeler, "The Control of Land other railway connecting the river Volga with Moscow would substantially 14 Routes: Russian Railways in Central Asia'; Journal of the Royal Central Asian Society 21 facilitate the supply of troops in the capital. (1934), 585-608; D. W. Spring, "Railways and Economic Development in Turkestan Be- From the moment Russia's first overland railways were inaugurated they fore 1917", in Russian Transport. A Historical and Geographical Survey, ed. L. Symons and were used by the regime to consolidate its power within the empire's borders C.